Guest guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 I feel that bhasma treatment is a matter of specialisation. Those who are not properly trained / qualified institutionally and do not have the confidence to use them should be better off them, rather than just arguing for the sake of argumentation. Laymen should be definitely not using them of their own accord, by reading books or through friendly advises.using herbs and staying safe would be a better policy for them. And by the way, signs and symptoms are indeed Trividha Pariksha, which I think I am in a better position to understand than anybody explaining me,that too a non-doctor person. Dr.D.B.Muzumdar M.D.Ayurveda-Medicine (Mumbai-India) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 The question is not about the person dispensing the bashmas in this case but rather the quality of the product itself. Its questionable toxic effects on the body has been diagnosed by specialist in several countries now - so it appears that bashmas can cause metal toxicity to the body. If, as you suggest that bhasma treatment is a matter of specialisation then it appears you agree that bhasmas are dangerous in the wrong hands. Why have you come to this conclusion? Is it because of the toxicity issue or some other reason? I don't personally see what confidence has to do with it, except in this case because of the concern that is being expressed regarding its safety. Thank you for sharing your opinion. John > I feel that bhasma treatment is a matter of specialisation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 i have personally come across a spiritual person who lived 117 years youthfully another native physician died at the age of 92 with extraordinary health conditions they lived and both of them improved their health by consuming mercury compound, gold etc. i accept and follow the texts of ancient masters and i too belive these products will help to extend life . R.vidhyasagar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 It is definitely the quality of product that counts when results are expected, either favourable or adverse. The toxicity is found in products with questionable manufacture, when the processing of metals and minerals is not done totally according to Rasashastra specifications, but are processed using short-cuts. Bhasma treatment definitely requires a greater insight in evaluating Prakruti, Agni, Koshtha, Saatmya, Dushya, Desha, Bal and many other factors. Bhasma indications are not empirical. A proper combination has to be derived at, taking into consideration the various factors mentioned. The adverse effects could happen if all factors do not match properly. Hence the issue of specialisation is important. Toxicity and adverse effects are two seperate phenomena. Toxicity occurs because of improper manufacture while adverse effects happen due to improper application of usage. Even water can turn into poison for a patient of renal failure. Even vitamins can cause bad effects due to overdosage. Medication is after all a responsible job. Most of the practitioners in India feel that the issue of toxicity is hyper-advertised, just to malign the image of Ayurveda, as Ayurveda has started to gain popularity , which the medicos of modern medicine do not wish to happen. Modern drugs are turning out to be toxins and poisons in various aspects, inspite of their detailed testings and trials, vouching for safety in human consumption. Then, how the scenario will change after testing for bhasmas, from those who are baised in their views about Ayurveda? Dr.D.B.Muzumdar M.D.Ayurveda-Medicine (Mumbai-India) The question is not about the person dispensing the bashmas in this case but rather the quality of the product itself. I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 It's not just Bhasma, but is true of many herbal decoctions and allopathic medicines as well -- that if they are not prepared well, they can be toxic -- why can't Bhasma be put in the same category as other medicines then? I have personally witnessed the power of Bhasma myself during my treatment - I don't quite recall if that Bhasma was made from mercury or not, but was so powerful that it took care of splitting headache in just a matter of 5-8 minutes. I have not seen an allopathic analgesic work so fast. Matt The question is not about the person dispensing the bashmas in this case but rather the quality of the product itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 that assumes that the product is non-toxic in the first place, which has not yet been established dr. vidhyasagar mentioned that he has met long-lived people that have taken bhasmas, for which i can easily reply there are many other people who have engaged in less than 'safe' habits who also display remarkable longevity for e.g., comedian George Burns smoked on average of 10-15 cigars a day and lived to a hundred; and most recently, there is France's Jeanne Calment, who lived to 122, and regularly smoked cigarettes and drank port --- however, we could hardly recommend these as 'healthy' practices, and it should not stop us from assessing and defining the risk very clearly so that doctors and patients are clearly informed toxicity must be established for bhasmas simply because the starting material are identified toxins enough with conjecture please Caldecott todd www.toddcaldecott.com _________________ It is definitely the quality of product that counts when results are expected, either favourable or adverse. The toxicity is found in products with questionable manufacture, when the processing of metals and minerals is not done totally according to Rasashastra specifications, but are processed using short-cuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Assuming toxicity as well as non toxicity of the Bhasma is unwise. There are many factors involved. We will have to start with writing Standard Operating Procedures of manufacturing bhasma. The toxic or non toxic effects by use of Bhasma manufactured as per SOPs in normal individual and in patients indicated for the use of Bhasma should be observed. Duration of use of bhasma, doses, anupana has to be decided before their use. The Bhasma used in Kalapa and in isolation may have some different effects. We have to work on it. We will have to decide first e.g. whether Somanathi Tamra bhasma should be used in manufacturing Sutashekhara or a Tamra Bhasma in which formation, a oozing liquid of Umbar is used should be used for the manufacturing of Sutashekara and after that we can observe toxicity of Tamra bhasma in Sutashrkhara. Again while judging toxicity of Tamra bhasma in Sutashekar we must keep in mind that for the manufacturing Sutashekar we are using kajjali in which Mercury is used. There are so many factors are embedded in each others. Hence I think discussion on issue of toxicity of Bhasma will lead us to more confusion and toward big zero. A positive action and research must be done. This is only possible at institutional or government level. Vaidya Upadhye http://www.astroayurvedalogy.com http://www.astrotreat.blogspot.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 I have no problem with the recommendation that ayurveda herbs/medicines used for medical purposes really need to be dispensed by a person trained in ayurvedic and ayurvedic medicine. This becomes clear of course once one knows and has studies such and worked with them. Common sense really. However this is not what happens in the world we live in as the herbs are freely available in some places, as are the compounds that are made from them like the Bhasmas we have been discussing. With the bhasmas in question, we do not appear to have any study proving they contain any toxic elements or not. But it is suggested that there are people out there making these products that have not followed the proper guidelines as you say and therefore, for this reason the products may contain toxins/heavy metals. If this is indeed the case, (I am leaving the issue of scientific testing of products for now) then there needs to be some testing down by exporters before they are allowed to export these products out of India. Is it possible for you, in your position to promote this with the Indian Government? I would agree that the few cases of people being diagnosed with metal toxicity from Ayurveda herbs containing metals has received a great deal of publicity from the scientific community because Ayurveda is beginning to become more popular outside India. There are forces at work here perhaps which have their own motives. Yet the issues they raise do need to be answered in a clear and scientific manner to gain credibility. Yes, the texts are clear and give good guidelines which is fine for India today, but over here we have to provide scientific evidence to backup what we say rather than pointing to texts - something that will come to India in due course also. It is a difficult paradigm shift I guess. Namaste John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 Research in toxicity of medicines in the current era started because modern medicine / allopathy started experimenting with isolation of active factors from natural ingredients and trying them on animals. Before trying these molecules on human beings, the LD-50 ( 50 percent of lethal dose) dose had to be determined according to the Food and Drug regulations. This is how the toxicity testing concept came into practice. When we think of Ayurveda, the situation is different. Rasashastra which originated in medieval times, was upheld by Raj-Vaidyas ie. the physicians of King / ruler. The royal families always preferred, supported and guarded the treatment of bhasmas and Raj-Vaidyas. Now, is it not the matter of common sense, that had the bhasmas been so rampantly toxic, would the blue blood be so much irresponsible to flounder their precious lives, health and wealth, in the name of bhasmas? All these bhasmas have been in use since more than 400 years, to be most conservative. If the proportions of toxicity were so significant, would the prevelent civilisations continue the trend of therapeutic use of bhasmas for so many centuries? All members should take this history into consideration too. Or then consider that all Indians and their rulers were fools who continued to use bhasmas inspite of experiencing the morbidity and mortality due to bhasmas. Sarve Bhadrani Pashyantu Dr.D.B.Muzumdar M.D.Ayurveda-Medicine(Mumbai-India0 < dahpc > Assuming toxicity as well as non toxicity of the Bhasma is unwise. There are many factors involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 as far as i know the rasa shastra of the natha siddhas was developed as a kind of sadhana - i doubt any one of them would have suggested that these practices be undertaken by just anyone, and esp. those who might be ill your point about rasa shatra being the domain of kings is well-taken - after, who else would have been able to subsidize a physician to painstakingly prepare these remedies? apart from the knowledge, the time and care it takes to prepare such remedies would have made them rare therapeutic choices, as opposed to natural herbs and foods for 99% of the population - indeed, remedies fit for a king! and yet, let's say after 20 years of bhasma usage, the king develops a disease, perhaps of the nervous system or kidneys - how many physicians would have known that the cause were the heavy metals? are you very confident physicians would have the clinical skills alone to determine the cause, if it was lead or mercury toxicity? i am not so sure... best... Todd Caldecott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.